[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200812052301.45450.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 23:01:44 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org,
lenb@...nel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
tiwai@...e.de, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Regression from 2.6.26: Hibernation (possibly suspend) broken on Toshiba R500 (bisected)
On Friday, 5 of December 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Thu, 4 Dec 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > The third thing that worries me is the _very_ early occurrence of
> >
> > ACPI: Waking up from system sleep state S3
> > APIC error on CPU1: 00(40)
> > ACPI: EC: non-query interrupt received, switching to interrupt mode
> >
> > Now, that "APIC error" thing is worrisome. It's worrisome for multiple
> > reasons:
> >
> > - errors are never good (0x40 means "received illegal vector", whatever
> > caused _that_)
> >
> > - more importantly, it seems to imply that interrupts are enabled on
> > CPU1, and they sure as hell shouldn't be enabled at this stage!
> >
> > Do we perhaps have a SMP resume bug where we resume the other CPU's
> > with interrupts enabled?
> >
> > - the "ACPI: EC: non-query interrupt received, switching to interrupt
> > mode" thing is from ACPI, and _also_ implies that interrupts are on.
> >
> > Why are interrupts enabled that early? I really don't like seeing
> > interrupts enabled before we've even done the basic PCI resume.
>
> Oh, I finally started looking more at this.
>
> It's because the PCI layer uses the late resume for resuming. Which is
> horrid. It really shouldn't. Resuming your device after interrupts were
> enabled really sounds like a disaster. *Especially* if the device was
> active before, either because of hibernation or simply because firmware
> pre-initialized it to some "live" state (which could easily happen with
> ethernet in particular).
>
> I do wonder why the PCI layer wants to resume things so late. It sounds
> totally insane to do things like resume the PCI bridge setup long *after*
> you have resumed other devices early. So by doing the default resume late,
> it just means that nobody can possibly use the early resume, and now
> everybody needs to resume everything with interrupts already going full
> blast.
>
> IOW, the _sane_ thing would be to do something like the following patch
> does, namely:
>
> - if the driver has a suspend or suspend_early function, _only_ call that
> (whether legacy or not)
>
> - otherwise, do the default suspend/resume late/early with interrupts
> disabled.
>
> which means that by default, we'll do all save-restore of the PCI state
> close to the actual CPU suspend event as possible.
>
> Of course, hibernate probably depends on ->suspend() saving state, which
> it won't. Again, if thats' the case, then that's just hibernate (again)
> being totally fundamentally broken, and messing with STR functions.
No, hibernate doesn't care whether ->suspend() or ->suspend_late() saves
the state, if that's what you mean. Also, we have the hibernation-specific
callbacks in the new framework anyway.
> Rafael?
Well, actually I think we should go further and save the standard config
registers of _all_ PCI devices in the _late() callbacks (ie. with interrupts
disabled) and restore them in the _early() callbacks.
I don't really understand why pci_restore_state() is not called by the core
and every single driver calls it by itself. Moreover, many of them
call pci_set_power_state(dev, PCI_D0) before calling pci_restore_state(),
although this is not really necessary, because they subsequently call
pci_enable_device() which calls pci_set_power_state(dev, PCI_D0) again.
IOW, I would split the resume of PCI devices into two parts, the first of
which will call pci_restore_state() with interrupts disabled and the second
will do the remaining stuff.
> I have neither tested the patch nor even tried to compile it - it's meant
> to be an example and get people thinking about this, rather than anything
> else.
I'm going to try it, though, and see what happens. ;-)
Thanks,
Rafael
> ---
> drivers/pci/pci-driver.c | 20 ++++++++++----------
> 1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci-driver.c b/drivers/pci/pci-driver.c
> index b4cdd69..6395983 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/pci-driver.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/pci-driver.c
> @@ -346,8 +346,6 @@ static int pci_legacy_suspend(struct device *dev, pm_message_t state)
> if (drv && drv->suspend) {
> i = drv->suspend(pci_dev, state);
> suspend_report_result(drv->suspend, i);
> - } else {
> - pci_default_pm_suspend(pci_dev);
> }
> return i;
> }
> @@ -361,7 +359,8 @@ static int pci_legacy_suspend_late(struct device *dev, pm_message_t state)
> if (drv && drv->suspend_late) {
> i = drv->suspend_late(pci_dev, state);
> suspend_report_result(drv->suspend_late, i);
> - }
> + } else if (!drv || !drv->suspend)
> + pci_default_pm_suspend(pci_dev);
> return i;
> }
>
> @@ -373,8 +372,6 @@ static int pci_legacy_resume(struct device *dev)
>
> if (drv && drv->resume)
> error = drv->resume(pci_dev);
> - else
> - error = pci_default_pm_resume(pci_dev);
> return error;
> }
>
> @@ -386,6 +383,8 @@ static int pci_legacy_resume_early(struct device *dev)
>
> if (drv && drv->resume_early)
> error = drv->resume_early(pci_dev);
> + else if (!drv || !drv->resume)
> + error = pci_default_pm_resume(pci_dev);
> return error;
> }
>
> @@ -420,8 +419,6 @@ static int pci_pm_suspend(struct device *dev)
> if (drv->pm->suspend) {
> error = drv->pm->suspend(dev);
> suspend_report_result(drv->pm->suspend, error);
> - } else {
> - pci_default_pm_suspend(pci_dev);
> }
> } else {
> error = pci_legacy_suspend(dev, PMSG_SUSPEND);
> @@ -441,7 +438,8 @@ static int pci_pm_suspend_noirq(struct device *dev)
> if (drv->pm->suspend_noirq) {
> error = drv->pm->suspend_noirq(dev);
> suspend_report_result(drv->pm->suspend_noirq, error);
> - }
> + } else if (!drv->pm->suspend)
> + pci_default_pm_suspend(pci_dev);
> } else {
> error = pci_legacy_suspend_late(dev, PMSG_SUSPEND);
> }
> @@ -458,8 +456,7 @@ static int pci_pm_resume(struct device *dev)
> pci_fixup_device(pci_fixup_resume, pci_dev);
>
> if (drv && drv->pm) {
> - error = drv->pm->resume ? drv->pm->resume(dev) :
> - pci_default_pm_resume(pci_dev);
> + error = drv->pm->resume ? drv->pm->resume(dev) : 0;
> } else {
> error = pci_legacy_resume(dev);
> }
> @@ -467,6 +464,7 @@ static int pci_pm_resume(struct device *dev)
> return error;
> }
>
> +
> static int pci_pm_resume_noirq(struct device *dev)
> {
> struct pci_dev *pci_dev = to_pci_dev(dev);
> @@ -478,6 +476,8 @@ static int pci_pm_resume_noirq(struct device *dev)
> if (drv && drv->pm) {
> if (drv->pm->resume_noirq)
> error = drv->pm->resume_noirq(dev);
> + else if (!drv->pm->resume)
> + error = pci_default_pm_resume(pci_dev);
> } else {
> error = pci_legacy_resume_early(dev);
> }
>
>
--
Everyone knows that debugging is twice as hard as writing a program
in the first place. So if you're as clever as you can be when you write it,
how will you ever debug it? --- Brian Kernighan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists